----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Either this nation shall kill racism, or racism shall kill this nation." (S. Jonas, August 2018; see the Supreme Court decision killing the Voting Rights Act, April 27, 2026; & see State Sen. Morris(R) LA, to Black voting rights supporters: 'Shut up, Boy!' "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How do you spell ICE in German? GESTAPO." (S. Jonas, July 2025)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"First, they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist.
"Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
"Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
"Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me." Pastor Martin Niemoller (c. 1946)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just before the 2016 elections, I published a column concerning Trump, James Comey and those elections: "Special to The Greanville Post | Commentary No. 63: 'The Cometization of the 2016 Elections: The Role of the Ruling Class.' " In the week before those elections, it discussed the probable role that Director Comey had played in the (projected) election of Donald J. Trump as President. In my view, it was a very significant role. Following Trump's election, Comey remained as Director of the FBI.
In that role, he determined that the FBI investigation into the possible role of Putin's Russia in making that election possible should be continued. Remember, that that investigation has been initiated in the summer of 2016, when a junior Trump staffer, one George Papadopoulos, while inebriated at a bar in London, happened to mention, to a man sitting at the same bar, who happened to be an Australian diplomat, that such a investigation was underway. That diplomat passed the story on to an acquaintance in the US diplomatic service in London, who passed it on . . . And it eventually led to the "Mueller Report," and its consequences, and non-consequences, that latter ensured by "Katy Barr the Door."
But that's another story. Here, I am rerunning an edited version of the column (again, published in the week before that election) on how, in my view, Comey won it for Trump. One, or history at any rate, can judge Trump for how much he valued that election interference, in terms of the vigor with which he is now, about 10 years leader, pursing his vendetta against Comey for continuing the Trump-election-interference investigation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"On July 5, 2016, the Director of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, James Comey, shooting like a comet over Washington, D.C., announced that after an extensive investigation, no criminal charges relating to the improper use/protection/transmission of classified documents would be brought against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. At the same time, he launched into an extensive negative analysis of what had been done with emails, sensitive or not, on State Department or private servers, by Mrs. Clinton and members of her staff. That statement, very unusual for an FBI Director to make, had a transitory effect on Clinton's poll numbers. But at the same time, the Director, in a highly unusual action, little noticed at the time, told leading Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee that it would keep them informed of any further developments.
"As is well-known, just now [about 10 days before the election] there have been further developments. Mr. Comey announced publicly that there would be a further (possible) investigation of "the Clinton emails." He made this announcement before any investigation had begun, much less concluded, and before his agents had obtained even so much as a warrant for seizing a laptop belonging to the estranged husband, Anthony Weiner, of one of Mrs. Clinton's closest aides, Huma Abedin. This action by Comey was considered to be highly unusual, to say the least, by a variety of sources/authorities, including, for example, The New York Times editorial page.
"It was even unclear as to whether, after some kind of preliminary evaluation, the previous formal inquiry would be reopened. The U.S. Justice Department strongly discouraged Comey from making such a speculative announcement (as in "there might be a further investigation after we've had a look at Mr. Weiner server which -- who knows -- might simply be filled with photos of Mr. Weiner's private parts taken from a wide variety of angles"). It appeared as if Mr. Comey himself might be violating the law, that is the 1939 Hatch Act, which prohibits government employees from taking actions close to elections which might influence their outcomes. A Republican, Richard Painter, who worked as the Chief Ethics Officer in the Bush White House (and a Clinton supporter this time around), went so far as to file a formal ethics complaint against Comey, for apparent violation of the Hatch Act (which would be a criminal offense).
"There have been a variety of political outcomes [in 10 days or so before the election] from the Comey action, ranging from no change in the Clinton/Trump poll numbers to significant changes in them, from no change in the generally predicted Clinton lock on the Electoral College vote to possibly enough of a Trump swing in the swing states to give the election to him. Most observers are not attributing ulterior motives to Mr. Comey. 'He made a simple mistake.' 'He was trying to be open about what is going on, but he was premature in making such an announcement -- poor judgement.' 'He was under pressure from Congressional Republicans. Suppose that he had not announced the further investigation [of a bunch of emails that might not even be Clinton's] in advance of its being undertaken, and then something had come of it after the election? Boy, would they be mad [or worse].' [It later came out that Comey may have been under pressure from pro-Trump FBI agents in the New York City office to pursue a "Clinton-investigation," who in turn were under pressure to do so from, guess who, one Rudy Giuliani.]
'Well, folks, I don't buy any of it. I think that what Comey did, from the July 'even though we have nothing criminal on you you're a bad girl' speech to the present 'we are announcing that an investigation will be starting [once we get a warrant], without any idea that anything further that might be incriminating might be found' is all part of a plan. (And yes, this is a conspiracy hypothesis, but not quite the kind that Alex Jones would come up with.) In 2013 Mr. Comey was given the customary ten-year term appointment as FBI Director by President Barack Obama. (Wonder why in all of this bruhaha from the Democrats Obama gave him a vote of confidence?) A career Federal prosecutor and occasional corporate lawyer who eventually became Deputy Attorney General under Bush, he is a Republican. He has had a reputation for highly ethical behavior.
'He does not live in a bubble, however. He had to have known that what he was doing when he gave his totally unnecessary [July] speech when he announced "no criminal findings" in the original Clinton emails/server case. While it did not seem to have any long-term political effects, it did stir the political pot at the time. This announcement has the pot boiling. It could swing the election to Trump. Although the conventional wisdom as of Nov. 1, when this column is being written, is that it won't, because of Clinton's heavy advantage in the Electoral College, Glenn Beck, an arch-reactionary who happens to be anti-Trump, thinks that Comey's announcement is "one of the most irresponsible things to ever happen" and could swing the election to Trump. And although unlikely, it could.
'So how did this happen? Well, Comet Comey has a phone (you can be sure that he doesn't do political stuff by email), and it is as secure a one as can be found. As I have pointed out previously, there is an increasingly large sector of the ruling class, led by some very wealthy hedge fund managers like the one who came to the Trump campaign along with Steve Bannon (from the Cruz campaign). They REALLY want Trump to win: further huge tax cuts for the wealthy and the end of regulation as we know it. My guess is that they got to Comey. What they offered or promised him, if anything at all, is impossible to know. But I do believe that that is what happened.
'Comey is a long-time Federal lawyer. He is now the Director of the FBI. He had to know about the Hatch Act, and that he would be violating it. He also knows that regardless of the outcome of the election he is never going to be prosecuted for doing so. Until last Friday, Trump was sinking and a number of down-ticket Republicans were going with him. Now [remember, as of Nov. 1, 2016], as the result of the "announcement" of something that might or might not happen, Trump is making huge hay of it and could win, and even more importantly the Republicans have a much better chance of holding on to the Senate.
'This did not happen by accident. An unprecedented announcement in October goes back to an unprecedented speech in July. Unprecedented once? Well, maybe by happenstance. Unprecedented twice? Well, not so much.'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And now, ten years later, after Comey may well have given him the 2016 election to him, Trump wants to put Comey in the dock, and in prison if possible. Although no one needs it this point, this single incident tells you everything you need to know about Trump.
(Article changed on May 15, 2026 at 3:36 PM EDT)
